Drugs, Terrorism and the Middle East, A failure in three parts:
It was not so long ago, in the great scheme of things, that the Middle East was the cradle of civilisation, giving birth to the Egyptian Empire, to Assyria, to Babylon and Judah. Later it see the rise of Islam and the Empire created by Mohammed and his successors, it would send the Ottoman fleet to fight Le Panto against Phillip II of Spain, and it would create and foster new intellectual pursuits such as medicine, arithmetic and philosophy. It was Islamic Scholars who revived the ancient manuscripts of Greece and Rome, who re-introduced irrigation and and public sanitation. Where Mohammed's empire bordered on the Christian world in the fantastic City of Cordoba white men would come and stare at the art and majesty of this creation. It was the Arabs and Moriscos who successfully cultivated the south of Spain, found ways to convert arid land into arable land, a feat which defeated the white farmers that followed. Yet today the Middle East is one of the most unstable and factional areas in the world, and one of the most important. To listen to the rhetoric that pours out of the mouths of the American Right you would think that that very cradle is now the source of all our woes.
The stability of the Middle east, the power balance and the maintenance of the status quo is incredibly important on a world stage for all sorts of reasons, even though the equally hysterical American Left seem to see oil as the only one. I hope to try and outline how the illegality of drugs threatens and de-stabilises the region, exacerbating the fractional political position.
However, firstly; a caveat. It's important to remember that we cannot assign the blame for the current situation entirely upon drugs - we should not seek too much to assign problems in their causation to the prohibition on drugs, however it is very easy to see how they greatly exacerbate the current situation.
It was not too long ago that I found
this article in the Cannabis forum, discussing the rise of Lebanese Cannabis once more. In this situation it is easy to see how the illegality of drugs will result in a poor situation for Lebanon, with the Lebanese government unable to capitalise on the growth of such a valuable crop leaving revenue in the hands of criminals and terrorists. It may be that some of the money made by this trade will actually find itself in the hands of "The Party of God" - Hezbollah, and deal even more damage to a weakened government. Farmers feel disenfranchised as the are unable to make reasonable profits from conventional arable products such as wheat and corn and the Lebanese Office for Agriculture has such a low budget because of the conflict that it cannot afford to subsidise these crops. This leaves the Farmers feeling negatively towards the state, and thus more inclined to illegal activity anyway and, along with the fiscal strains already placed upon them, they turn towards drug production. When that self same production is criticised and attack by the government the farmers feel even more disenfranchised and, whilst the government can't even spare the bulldozers to tear down the crops, the farmers distaste for the government runs unchecked. This, as you can see, sets up a conflict, another conflict in an already factional zone.
So whilst creating extra conflict, it should also be taken into account that Cannabis and the Opium Poppy (Papaver Somniferum) have, historically, been as much staple products of the region as hops has been in Britain. Opium was a normal part of society - it was consumed even by the Babylonians. Cannabis was similarly thrown on fires by Scythians who would inhale the bonfire smoke. It is important to remember that banning these crops is like banning hops - it fundamentally attacks and denigrates the culture that has accepted them as being important and central for a large part of it's history. This will naturally create ill-feeling, especially when the prohibition of drugs is so conclusively linked with America and so-called "Western Imperialism". The Prohibition of drugs is viewed, in some quarters, as Western intervention in Arabic affairs, a view enforced by the crop dusting of Opium Poppy fields by American Aircraft, which leads us on to Afghanistan:
The economy of Afghanistan is now over 60% reliant on the Opium industry, producing over 90% of the worlds supply. It has always been an important crop for the region but now its importance is massive. The illegality of drugs and the interference of the west has provided a rallying standard for terrorists and Anti-American's to garner support for their views. But the really big problem is - most of that's untaxed. Which means that the Afghanistan government can't get their hands on about 60% of their country's yearly business, which is obviously not good for an already underfunded government. The same happens in Lebanon, where profits could be put towards encouraging conventional crop growth and to dealing with problems with rebels, but fall into the hands of traffickers and criminals. We have even see opium fields springing up in the South of Iraq, where Opium has historically rarely been grown before - talk about being your own worst enemy America!
On top of that drugs can be certainly identified as a cause for rebellion because of the way drug laws operate. Drug Traffickers and Farmers must come into contact with an established criminal network, almost certainly partially constructed by terrorist organisations. They have to operate covertly, away from the eyes of the government, they are hidden and they become part of an undercover society. Within this society radical views are far more freely banded about, government regulation cannot access them, temperate voices are forced out and, increasingly, ordinary people like farmers are being radicalised because their crop is discriminated against and because they have a greater contact with these criminal and terrorist organisations. This means they have a quicker root to getting involved in terrorist activity, they provide funds for terrorists (another big issue) and they set up a conflict within a state. So the government is set against its own people, which provides the foundations for rebellion. The laws also match up hardened and experienced criminals with terrorists who can make use of them.
Of course the debate still rages as to exactly how much money from the drugs trade goes into terrorist hands. Certainly it has long been rumoured that Al Qaeda has massive stockpiles of opium and heroin off which it will profit greatly if American efforts are ever successful in that region, which suggests a hand in production and trafficking. The well established trafficking route via the northern mountain ranges is rumoured to be taxed by Al Qaeda and certainly the production facilities in the mountains themselves are sometimes run by Al Qaeda. The trade is essentially providing the grease which keeps the wheels of rebellion in motion. Add onto that the cost of enforcing the laws and you have a huge bill which the Middle East can't foot - so America gets more involved and thus exacerbates the problem. I think it would be hard to look at American Foreign policy decisions, saving perhaps those in South America and with Russia, in the last half of the previous century and not simply see a string of failures.
The fact remains that the legalisation of drugs should not be regarded, in any way, as a panacea for the problems of the middle east but we can be sure it will reduce conflict, it will increase stability and it will provide profits for failing and underfunded governments. I am sure I am not the first to think this and I wonder if any of you agree with me on this?
12-10-2007, 21:29
Linear Mode
